MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998988031 · doi:10.1061/9780784481837.001

Structural Design and Construction Challenges on the South and West of Edmonton Area Development Project

2018· article· en· W2998988031 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jondy Britton, Meagan Moeller, Wellan Cowan, Jacob Merriman, Chih‐Hung Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderground infrastructure and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)Variety (cybernetics)Work (physics)EngineeringConstruct (python library)Civil engineeringService (business)Construction engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringGeographyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2013, AltaLink initiated work on the South and West of Edmonton Area development project comprised of multiple 138-kV and 240-kV circuit modifications. Scopes included greenfield construction, rebuilding existing lines, and tapping existing lines to new substations. The complicated project scopes were challenging to construct due to outage constraints, environmental restrictions, and the need for multiple foundation solutions. Proper outage planning with the AltaLink Control Center was imperative and directly impacted the construction sequencing of the project. Environmental concerns affected the project in multiple ways: work restrictions during bird nesting and migration seasons, requirements for rig matting in environmentally sensitive and wet areas, and the use of vehicle wash stations. A variety of structure types were implemented on the project including double-circuit latticed steel towers, single-, double-, and triple-circuit tubular steel poles, and wood poles. Foundation types, including drilled shafts, helical foundations, and direct embed foundations, were selected based on structure type and location. Construction commenced in early 2017, and the project was placed in service in December 2017.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUnderground infrastructure and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207